which design is better?

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by chips, Feb 23, 2006.

  1. chips

    chips ...

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Messages:
    3,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2006
  2. hitmikey

    hitmikey DRIVEN FROM WITHIN

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2000
    Messages:
    7,462
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    NY
    both give different impressions. i feel like the 2nd gives the impression that there is a wealth of information on the website while the 1st offers simplicity and straightforwardness.

    i guess use that to determine which one you are trying to achieve
     
  3. chips

    chips ...

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Messages:
    3,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    well i did the 1st and some one else did the 2nd the bigest issue with the 1st was the content.. I was given very little info.. or picutres to put up
     
  4. antiyou

    antiyou OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    25,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    in ur base
  5. chips

    chips ...

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Messages:
    3,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    Anymore feed back?
     
  6. jwynn

    jwynn Yeah I Know I Dont Have Enough Posts

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2006
    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    FL
    The first.
     
  7. nicklovgren

    nicklovgren The only thing that really worried me was the ethe

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    wisconsin
  8. MrMan

    MrMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like the second, but I don't like the big introduction type images on both. You click on one link, and the whole layout changes. No intro pages!
     
  9. Grelmar

    Grelmar New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Great White North
    Just for reference, this is what the search engines see when they look at you pages:

    The 1st:
    [​IMG]


    and the second:
    [​IMG]


    (roughly what the search engines see)

    The SE's will ignore the keywords in your meta tag. SE's, by and large, ignore all meta nowadays.

    Off hand, I would say:

    I like the "look" of the first page more, but it's easier to understand what the site is about from the second.

    Also: the second version, the links fall "below the fold" on lower resolution screens, and even on a 1024x768 screen if the browser has a full set of buttons showing. That'll loose you a lot of traffic.

    The second page has all the copy text embedded in the image. This is a bad idea that graphic artists love. Text should be text, not an image of text. SE's can't read images of text.

    Take the first one, add a bit of descriptive copy below the image, for both the casual surfer and the SE's to read, and call it a day.

    IMHO, of course.
     

Share This Page